To clarify, what Walski meant by ‘moot’ was purely from a moralistic point of view. In the post, Walski also mentioned the opinion of some shariah experts on the matter – that the conversion of minors was meaningless.
Walski also predicted that the cabinet announcement would be met with protest, and that it would only be a matter of time.
Well, guess what?
Prior to this there already was some dissenting noise in the bloggerhood, which did not surprise Walski one bit.
It’s as if these people are trying to make some heavenly quota…
(religious compulsion, and more, in the full post)
There’s also the concept of fairness, which is probably totally lost on this lot. The thought of putting themselves in the others’ shoes simply does not exist, it would seem. Neither is the concept of equality – instead it’s this notion that “true justice” requires different treatment of the law upon different people.
Granted, it did occur to Walski that the announcement (some see it as a decree) by cabinet would raise complications. For one, as Juslo pointed out, that Islamic laws come under the purview of each state and territory, and that all areas would have to come to a consensus to agree to amend existing laws.
There is another view, however: that the announcement by the Cabinet is actually in harmony with existing laws, and that it rather the matter of interpretation that is a problem. Do pay The People’s Parliament a visit, and read this post in its entirety. Walski’s no lawyer, but it does appear that the crux of the matter is indeed in the interpretation, and that the law actually doesn’t need fixing.
Unlike the folks in the YouTube video earlier.
Whatever happened, Walski wonders, to this thing about there being no compulsion in religion?
Especially compelling religion on those at an age where they cannot even comprehend what it is that’s being compelled upon them.
Strange. Whose rights exactly are being trampled upon here?
Like they say, real life is always stranger than fiction…